Archive for April, 2012

Spiking the Football

Monday, April 30th, 2012

There’s a certain etiquette to spiking the football that Mr. Obama lacks. I consider spiking the ball unsportman like, but be that as it may, some relish the practice. Only you don’t spike the ball in the middle of the game after getting a first down while you are losing.

Obama’s newest venture into the realm of the Anti-Midas comes with an ad questioning whether Mr. Romney would have made the same call. (I’ll spare you the ad.) Romney, surprisingly, quipped back “even Jimmy Carter would have made the call.” That will leave a mark.

Then comes Peter Bergen of CNN to further the story, which included this:

 

Bin Laden’s principal conduit to his organization was Atiyah Abdul Rahman, a Libyan militant of about 40. Viewed by officials in the West as no more than a mid-tier terrorist, Rahman was actually bin Laden’s chief of staff. In a 48-page memo to Rahman written in October 2010, bin Laden told him that al Qaeda’s longtime sanctuary in Pakistan’s tribal areas was now too dangerous because of the campaign of American drone strikes there. The CIA had launched a record number of strikes into the tribal regions during 2010. Bin Laden wrote, “I am leaning toward getting most of our brothers out of the area.”

Bin Laden advised his followers not to move around the tribal regions except on overcast days when America’s all-seeing satellites and drones would not have as good visibility of the area. He complained that, “the Americans have great accumulated expertise of photography of the region due to the fact they have been doing it for so many years. They can even distinguish between houses that are frequented by male visitors at a higher rate than is normal.”

bin Ladin knew he was hot and about to get hotter in October of 2010.

Now let’s look at this from The Daily Mail who claim Seal Team Six took offense to Obama spiking the football:

A former intelligence official who was serving in the US government when bin Laden was killed said that the Obama administration knew about the al-Qaeda leader’s whereabouts in October 2010 but delayed taking action and risked letting him escape.

Not only was he spiking the football, but he stood by the goal line killing time before he did it.
Why did he wait? What could he be saving this for?
Oh. Yeah.
Nah, this isn’t spiking the football. This is a year long celebration in the end zone.
How can he celebrate when he promised to not rest until everyone had a job?

 

 

Willard -Updated

Saturday, April 14th, 2012

 

With all due deference to Misha who writes:

I will hold my nose in November and vote for that stinking shyster Mittens if he’s the candidate, and I will hate myself for it forever more. I will never forgive myself. I will never try to excuse it. I will have betrayed my conservative principles by doing so, and there is no way around that, because it’s true.

But I, personally, can’t choose the other option. To me, it’s worse.

and Teh Crunch-ster who writes:

So yes, I will vote for Mittens. And I won’t hold my nose while doing so, because after three years of watching my country be destroyed, I will gladly do anything to save her. Four more years of the radical America hating communists will kill her, and we will have allowed it to happen because we took our ball and went home.

Spoken like a true Marine, Crunch, but that doesn’t solve the problem. Heck, that only identifies one of the problems. And it entrenches the country-club republicans into a fortified position- not that the worms will be there long- they’ll screw that up, as well.

Since the TEA party handed the republicans the 2010 mid-term election on a silver platter, what, exactly, did the TEA party get in return? Leadership in the committees? Financial backing for elections? Promises of campaign appearances? HAH! They get nothing. Thankyouverymuch.

If you guys want to bend over and spread ‘em, at least get something for it. A reach around- something.

Before I even contemplate a vote for Willard, I want to know who torpedoed Herman Cain. If you will notice, his accusers vanished after he suspended his campaign. Don’t tell me Obama’s people did that to him, it’s got Karl Rove’s fingerprints all over it. That was an operation by republicans against one of their one.

Conservatives will never get to sit at the grown-up’s table if we keep electing RINO bitches. RINO’s allowed two Marxists on the Supreme Court- not that they could have done much, but they did nothing. It’s almost like they are colluding with these Marxists.

Case in point, from the L.A. Slimes:

The campaign also made public via a website both Obama’s and Biden‘s tax returns going back to the year 2000.

“Governor Romney has yet to provide tax returns from the period in which he made hundreds of millions as a corporate buyout specialist, or as governor of Massachusetts, the experience he says qualifies him to be president,” Obama campaign manager Jim Messina said in a statement. “Mitt Romney’s defiance of decades of precedent set by presidential candidates on both sides of the aisle, including his own father, begs the question – what does he have to hide?”

If Willard can’t hit that beachball over the fence, he has no business in the race.

Ya think someone at the Romney campaign might suggest Obama release his college transcripts? Maybe Obama will release his passport files. Or maybe Obama will have the Hawaii Dept. of Health issue a statement claiming the birth certificate he posted is legitimate- unlike himself. But no, birther nonsense will get us nowhere. It’s almost as if everyone knows this maggot is an illegal alien, but are sworn to silence.

But seriously, since when did rules matter for either side of the aisle? We have “sanctuary cities” that refuse to deport illegals and the feds just look the other way. If the rules don’t matter, why have them?

By your own admission, Willard would only slow the pace of decline.

Republicans have done nothing to curb the ever increasing size of the federal government. They allowed out of control borrowing. They allowed the Dems to proceed without a budget.

Republicans say they support individuals freedom, but they narrow the field down to the candidate they decide. That’s not a choice.

When did I agree to this? At what point did I consciously decide that this government should be in the business of telling me what kind of Chinese light bulb to use? When did I decide to water down my vote by allowing illegal aliens to vote without a ID and demand workers show one when voting to install a union in a workplace? Why do I have to be a part of this farce?

No, I’ll have none of it.

Because of the location of my birth , I am required to be subject to the laws the current government deems to enforce? When did I agree to that? This government, and both parties, have broken their agreement with me by their failure to enforce the law equally. The ballot box is broken. The courts are broken. There’s only one box left.

 

“Contemplate the mangled bodies of your countrymen, and then say ‘what should be the reward of such sacrifices?’ Bid us and our posterity bow the knee, supplicate the friendship and plough, and sow, and reap, to glut the avarice of the men who have let loose on us the dogs of war to riot in our blood and hunt us from the face of the earth? If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom, go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen!”–Samuel Adams

 

Sooner or later Igor Panarin’s prediction will come to fruition.

 

Rurik notes:

Some of us seem tempted to let The Imposter win, just to spite Romney, while concentrating on holding the House and winning back the Senate. You really think? Sure we can repeal Obamacare once we have the Senate. Sure? Consider this.

If the False Dmitry is reelected, it will give him legitimation, and legitimize all his deeds of the previous four years. Today we can claim the American People did not know who and what they were voting for, but that excuse will be gone if he is reelected, whether by fair means or foul. In the view of the average voter, of the outside world, and of History.

Particularly in the view of History, since it is generally written by the victors. We who opposed The King of Clubs will be clubbed and silenced. All the negative evidence will be decisively suppressed and destroyed. His acolytes, like Axelrod, Fairey, Holder, Ayers, and others will see to that. Waverers and fence-sitters will get back with the program.

And repeal of Obozocare, or anything else? How likely are you to get the Congress, with its RINO faction, to agree to repealing the signature program of a president only just reelected? Even if you were to succeed, would not the legislation be vetoed by the incumbent? And if the veto were overridden? Why would not the reelected tyrant just refuse to recognize and obey that law? Just as he does now. He has already demonstrated his contempt for any law he does not like. Or any Court decision. What makes anyone think that a new Congress would take action when so many members have already submitted without murmur? A new Congress will be bold only with a new President.

Further, if The King of Clubs is reelected, there is even less chance he will step aside in 2016. Why should he? As just stated, he has already shown his disrespect and disregard for Law and Constitution. Why would he not repeal the XXII Amendment? Perhaps by administrative decree, as he has done with other matters – just to rub our noses in it. Or maybe he’ll just declare the whole old document obsolete, null and void, and establish himself as King (or Caliph?) Maybe he will continue the Roman Imperial tradition of preserving the hollowed out forms while ruling as autocrat. Would that make it any more palatable? It is a rule of history, Legitimation begets power; and power begets more power.

Perhaps the Supreme Court may save us? If the Imposter is returned for another four (or more) years, will not some of the older justices abandon hope of outlasting him and just retire? Or perhaps someone such as Thomas or Alito might have a sudden attack of Breitbart’s Disease.

As for Willdard Mitt. I do think it is a reasonable assumption that if he is able to take the White House, he will bring along control of both houses of Congress. And that should stiffen his back and point his note in the Right direction. It could also be a useful constitutional experiment. Back when our system was first set up the Founding Fathers intended that the chief authority and power should reside in the two houses of Congress. The President was to be only a chief executive officer of the will of our elected representatives. The President was to preside. That requires administrative ability, not necessarily leadership vision. In fact, the founders would have preferred to see “The Vision Thing” embodied in the greater of our private citizens. Mitt could be just the mediocrity they had in mind, and not some vainglorious Man of Destiny on his white horse.

 

I think he has a point. It’s on top of his head, but it’s a good point. It would be pretty hard to pull off a bluff on the RINO’s demanding such things as committee placement when everyone knows a Willard loss is the death knell.

That being said, somebody better come up with a plan. When you have the enemy on the run a tactician will tell you to pursue them “To the last gasp of man and beast”.

I want indictments.

Send in the Drones

Tuesday, April 10th, 2012

Today we shall explore the case of Rodney Brossart. He is the guy that was accused of ‘rustling’ cattle and was arrested by a SWAT team with the help of a drone in North Dakota.

From November 6, 2011:

NEAR LAKOTA, ND (WDAZ-TV) – A months-long standoff southeast of Lakota, ND, has ended after two of the family members involved were arrested in a field and three others surrendered.

“We put a tactical operational plan together this afternoon and we implemented it and everything went as planned for us, so we’re very pleased that we did end with a peaceful resolution this evening,” Nelson County Sheriff Kelly Janke said.

**********

Nelson County Sheriff’s deputy Eric Braathen says a juvenile, school-aged child was also taken into custody.

**********

Sometime between 7 and 8 p.m. Sunday, Rodney’s other children, Abby, Alex and Thomas, gave themselves up at the family’s home without incident.

Then it gets good, kids.

 

Braathen says a tip called in lead to the farm field arrest. After some negotiation, Rodney and Jacob were arrested without incident. Braathen says they were not armed.

Then the story goes off the rails…

 

Braathen says family members at the home had been given some time to get things in order before being detained. Rodney’s mother was also apparently at the farmstead. She had been reportedly supplying the family with food during the ongoing ordeal.

Braathen says the mother, Susan, won’t be arrested. She remains with their three juvenile children on the farm that includes a house, trailer home and two RV trailers. She has agreed to appear in court Monday, too, on the Class A misdemeanor charge from June involving giving law enforcement false information.

Just trying to wrap mind mind around those last two paragraphs almost makes my head explode. First, magnanimously, Sheriff Andy Taylor Kelly Janke allows these people time to brush their teeth before going to jail. Then, the mother who committed the mortal sin of feeding her children was not arrested- only detained- on a misdemeanor charge of lying to law enforcement. What am I missing? The sheriff charges someone with lying and then makes them promise to show up for court? Take that Barney Fife’s bullet away.

So now we move on to a couple days ago…

The tiny town of Lakota, N.D., is quickly becoming a key testing ground for the legality of the use of unmanned drones by law enforcement after one of its residents became the first American citizen to be arrested with the help of a Predator surveillance drone.

Wooops, the first article quoted Deputy Braathen as saying it was a ‘tip’ that led them to the field. I guess he kinda left out the part about Homeland Security supplying the tip.

The bizarre case started when six cows wandered onto Rodney Brossart’s 3,000 acre farm. Brossart, an alleged anti-government “sovereignist,” believed he should have been able to keep the cows, so he and two family members chased police off his land with high powered rifles.

How do we know these are “sovereignists”? How can you tell them apart from, say, members of PETA? I mean if they would have claimed to be protecting the beasts from slaughter they could have avoided all this.

OR could they have?

We know they are incorrigible citizens because of the papers filed in court. Not the papers filed in this case, but another case in Supreme Court of the State of North Dakota:

Case No. 32-2011-CV-00045

From the brief:

ARGUMENT

German LTD.’s claim for relief by default is not supported by documents submitted by German LTD. that there was an actual default.

German LTD. failed to show proof that there was an actual attorney/client agreement.

The court cannot accept a judgment by default of Brossart. In German LTD.’s own filings, he shows the court that Brossart responded to the complaint brought before him. (R 8)

The summons and complaint was served upon Brossart by the Nelson County Sheriff on July 29, 2011. (R 3) Brossart responded to the summons and complaint on August 16, 2011. (R 8) That was on the 18th day of the 20 day deadline. Brossart’s response was, “This is my property I do not agree to this sale,” signed and dated by the Appellant, Rodney Brossart. German LTD. showed with a received dated stamp that the response was received on August 18, 2011. August 18, 2011 was the 20th day of the 20 day deadline to respond.

The Appellant, Rodney Brossart responded within the allotted time placed before him by German LTD. Therefore, judgment by default is not a decision that the court can make, according to North Dakota Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 55(a).

In all filings made by German LTD., he lacks to show that an attorney/client agreement actually existed according to North Dakota Rules of Professional Conduct Rule 1.5.

In the complaint, German LTD states, “on or about December 31, 2008, Rodney Brossart requested and authorized Raymond J. German, Attorney at Law, to perform legal services related to the Prescriptive Easement matter with William T. Franzen.” “Raymond J. German, Attorney at Law with the firm of Raymond J. German, Ltd., agreed to and did represent Rodney Brossart from December 31, 2008 to March 4, 2011, in exchange for payment of Attorney German’s legal services.” (R 2) This is merely words on paper not made legitimate by record or fact. German LTD. fails to show that an agreement between an attorney and client ever existed.

As you can see, this is about much more than six cows wandering onto his property.

The Honorable Sonja Clapp, Presiding Judge of the District Court, Northeast Central Judicial District was assigned to the case. (R 10) Brossart submitted a motion for summary judgment to the court. The Hon. Clapp, disqualified herself pursuant to Canon 3 (E)(1)(a) of the Code of Judicial Conduct. (R 12) All the judges in the Northeast Central Judicial District were later disqualified by the order of the Honorable Gerald W. VandeWalle. (R 13) The case was then assigned to the Hon. Christofferson. (R 14-15) Within days of being assigned to the case, the Hon. Christofferson denies Brossart’s Motion for Summary Judgment and awards German LTD. his claim of relief. (R 18)

Whoa. Looks like something else is afoot. Let’s look up Canon 3 (E)(1)(a), shall we?

ANSWER

There should be some period during which the judge recuses himself from any proceeding in which a former opponent for judicial office serves as an attorney, whether or not there is actual bias or prejudice on the part of the judge. If in fact the judge considers that there is actual partiality due to bias or prejudice, the recusal should last as long as the bias exists. If there is no actual bias, the length of the recusal period is governed by what is a reasonable time for the public perception to conclude that there is no bias. The decision as to the period of recusal should be determined by the judge.

Canon 3(E)(1)(a) of the North Dakota Code of Judicial Conduct specifies that

“A judge shall disqualify himself or herself in an proceeding in which the judge’s impartiality might reasonably be questioned including but not limited to instances where:

(a) the judge has a personal bias or prejudice concerning the party or a party’s lawyer . . ..”


All the judges were disqualified in central North Dakota for bias? So they find a judge that can hear the case and within days he rules against Brossart.

The case is still active.

The dates correspond to this time frame, as well.

This isn’t about cattle rustling, nor drones. This is about some lawyer with clout trying to get his land. They paint him as some militia type and send in the drones.

Wanna bet there is oil under that land?